Re: 100 % record in jepordy : Sun Mar 16, 2014 4:04 pm  

My leaning towards resting players is nothing about Leeds the week after or still expecting to win.

I see absolutely no point in playing players such as Walsh, Soliola, Turner and Walmsley with niggles and risking them to be out for 5+ weeks if it's aggravated. I'd rather take one or two losses than risk losing one or more of our best players for extended periods of time and losing considerably more games over that period.

Re: 100 % record in jepordy : Sun Mar 16, 2014 4:08 pm  

BackrowSaint wrote:

My leaning towards resting players is nothing about Leeds the week after or still expecting to win.

I see absolutely no point in playing players such as Walsh, Soliola, Turner and Walmsley with niggles and risking them to be out for 5+ weeks if it's aggravated. I'd rather take one or two losses than risk losing one or more of our best players for extended periods of time and losing considerably more games over that period.

That's not the argument. If not fit and at risk of being out for while then they shouldn't be risked but someone suggested sending a reserve side so to speak as we've got Leeds the following week.

What happens of we rest them next week and lose? Then lose to Leeds?


Let's put our strongest team available out and get a win. We can worry about Leeds after the wakey game but I don't see the point in resting players for Leeds. 2 points is 2 points no matter who it against.

Re: 100 % record in jepordy : Sun Mar 16, 2014 4:22 pm  

Well Im glad some of you think about not resting players as that says we should not be taken lightly.Past history indicates that Wakey - Saints games are never easy games for both clubs.

Re: 100 % record in jepordy : Sun Mar 16, 2014 4:51 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Whats the difference between losing to Wakefield and losing to Leeds exactly?

What I meant by that was that I am far more concerned with how we do vs Leeds than how we do vs Wakefield at this stage of the season. Surely the reason behind that is obvious. We've already shown against ok sides like Warrington and Hull KR that we are a decent team, I want to see how we do vs a good team.

Obviously I'm not saying we should just lose vs Wakefield, we'll go there to win. But if the injured players from Friday night don't play and we lose, or don't play well, it's not the end of the world at this stage of the season.

St pete wrote:

That's not the argument. If not fit and at risk of being out for while then they shouldn't be risked but someone suggested sending a reserve side so to speak as we've got Leeds the following week.

I assume this is aimed at me, as I am the only one has mentioned Leeds before now. But you seem to be making things up if so, because I haven't said anything about sending a reserve side? No idea where you got that from. I was talking about the players who have question marks over them, like how Backrow Saint explained.

Re: 100 % record in jepordy : Sun Mar 16, 2014 5:10 pm  

Albion wrote:

What I meant by that was that I am far more concerned with how we do vs Leeds than how we do vs Wakefield at this stage of the season. Surely the reason behind that is obvious. We've already shown against ok sides like Warrington and Hull KR that we are a decent team, I want to see how we do vs a good team.

Obviously I'm not saying we should just lose vs Wakefield, we'll go there to win. But if the injured players from Friday night don't play and we lose, or don't play well, it's not the end of the world at this stage of the season.

I assume this is aimed at me, as I am the only one has mentioned Leeds before now. But you seem to be making things up if so, because I haven't said anything about sending a reserve side? No idea where you got that from. I was talking about the players who have question marks over them, like how Backrow Saint explained.

Chill out, I didn't look who it was by and don't really care but my point remains the same.

Re: 100 % record in jepordy : Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:08 pm  

St pete wrote:

...but my point remains the same.

Great, and for what it's worth I agree with not resting players for the sake of it yet. Nobody has suggested that, though.

Re: 100 % record in jepordy : Sun Mar 16, 2014 8:47 pm  

My only concern would be a short turnaround between Wakey on Sunday and Leeds on the Friday. Perhaps two or three changes to keep things fresh would be a decent idea.

Re: 100 % record in jepordy : Sun Mar 16, 2014 10:23 pm  

Motherwell Saint wrote:

My only concern would be a short turnaround between Wakey on Sunday and Leeds on the Friday. Perhaps two or three changes to keep things fresh would be a decent idea.

But when we're already carrying two players (Wellens and Laffranchi) unless those two are amongst the players being rested, it would likely lead to a defeat.

Re: 100 % record in jepordy : Sun Mar 16, 2014 10:33 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

But when we're already carrying two players (Wellens and Laffranchi) unless those two are amongst the players being rested, it would likely lead to a defeat.

Who knew you could be third top tackler at the club and still be classified as carried ...

Re: 100 % record in jepordy : Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:49 am  

Magic Superbeetle wrote:

Who knew you could be third top tackler at the club and still be classified as carried ...

Perhaps in Laffranchi's case 'carried' is too harsh. But there is little contribution with the ball from him.